My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09-13-93 Zoning & Vacation
sbend
>
Public
>
Common Council
>
Minutes
>
Committee Meeting Minutes
>
1993
>
09-13-93 Zoning & Vacation
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/29/2013 11:06:37 AM
Creation date
1/29/2013 11:06:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council - City Clerk
City Council - Document Type
Committee Mtg Minutes
City Counci - Date
9/13/1993
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• <br /> Zonong and Vacation Committee <br /> September 13, 1993 <br /> Page 5 <br /> Council Member Slavinskas then asked if there was anyone who <br /> wished to speak in favor of the Bill. <br /> Mr. Philip Wilmes voiced concern with regard to the Riley <br /> High School project. <br /> Mr. John Byorni of the Area Plan staff noted the staff's <br /> recommendation of September 3 , 1993 (copy attached) . <br /> Council Member Slavinskas then asked if there was anyone <br /> present to speak in opposition to the proposed Bill. <br /> Mr. Gene Oakley stated that he believes that the petition is <br /> legally flawed and spoke against the proposed vacation. <br /> Mr. Vince Peterson stated that the Council should weigh what <br /> is best for the entire City. <br /> Jo Blacketor voiced concern with regard to the message that <br /> would be sent to the public if the Council moves forward on <br /> the proposed vacation. She stated that she believes it <br /> would violate, due process. She also voiced parking <br /> concerns. <br /> The Council Attorney noted that the Council and the public <br /> should keep in mind that the decisions to made this evening <br /> deal with whether the provisions of Title 36 of the Indiana <br /> Code addressing the vacation of public ways have been met by <br /> the Petitioner. She added that remonstrators to any <br /> vacation of a public way must show that: <br /> 1. that vacation would hinder the growth of orderly <br /> development in which it is located or to which it is <br /> contiguous; <br /> 2 . that the vacation would make access to lands of <br /> aggrieved persons by public way either difficult or <br /> inconvenient; <br /> 3 . that the vacation would hinder the public's access <br /> to a church, school, or other public place or building; <br /> 4 . the vacation would hinder the use of a public way <br /> by the neighborhood in which it is located or contiguous. <br /> The Council Attorney concluded that the decisions made by <br /> the Board of School Trustees are separate and distinct from <br /> the decision to be made by the South Bend Common Council on <br /> the proposed vacation. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.